Open 186; Jungle Republic (Game Over)

[saberwolf]

I can't quit, or I lose my bet. You already know that hewitt.

[hewitt]

I can't quit, or I lose my bet. You already know that hewitt.

Fuck you make everything so complicated.

[Paradoxombie]

Saber, you won't find much sympathy from me. You reap what you sow.

so what did I sow?

Your lynch, I feel you've contributed to it beyond just being scummy.

I can't quit, or I lose my bet. You already know that hewitt.

Fuck you make everything so complicated.

I don't see why things seem so complicated. I'd might take your urging for saber's replacement as a towntell if it didn't come off as so desperate. Possible buddy connection noted.

[ZEEnon]

GinzkeyPlatz has requested replacement.

[Sanhora]

Ok, done with reading. But I'll keep three players in mind as I had to look back to see what they have done, namely Hewitt, Lowell and Lynx.
After I was done with my analysis, I saw that there were only 8 names on the list. Leaving three players out of it, which were the above three players.
As I normally can talk about every active player without looking back, this is quite unusual. Which is why I wanted to make a seperate note for this.
After looking back, I could see things for two of them. Though not much, there was something. Leaving the third player, Hewitt. Which is either good or bad. Need to check him again to determine which it is.
Anyway, analysis up next. Pretty long, so I hope it's clear to everybody >.<

[Sanhora]

@Paradox
In post 12, you asked Hewitt if he has a read on you. Why did you want to know?
Post 166 is so scummy.
And posts 187 and 191 are odd posts. They just don’t fit in the state of this game.

@CKD
Am I right in thinking that your comment about SW trying to excuse his bad play has to do with him asking Paradox about a past game. In other words, does it have to do that he’s using meta in his favour?
As for your question regarding your BMC case, from the looks of his posts, I can’t tell if he saw it or not. His statement was too vague for me to see which posts he has read from SW.

@SW
Regarding post 30, what was your exact reason to ‘warn’ Paradox?
This post also raises a lot of question marks when you later state that this ‘warning’ means that you won’t use any gambits in post 35. I really don’t see the point in the ‘warning’ when the subject of the ‘warning’ won’t even be in play according to you.
And due to post 35, posts 38 and 40 raise a lot of question marks as you first stated that you don’t use meta, yet you now give an example of your play.
(Also post 40 seems as if you’re proud of what you’ve done in Open 185 ._.)
On to post 47, please state your exact plan how you wanted to get us out of the RVS as it seems you’re stating that this was all planned out and I’m not buying that.
If you thought that MR’s vote was scum motivated, then why didn’t you point it out earlier?
And what was the difference between GP’s play and MR’s play according to you?
Your vote against MR seems to be based upon disliking the way she plays. Something you accused MR off. Hypocricy (Which is what you should mean, not ironic) has been spotted. Add that what you said in post 214 is not what MR said. Misrep has been saved.

@Budja
Can you explain your vote against SW in post 32? Due to the following statement, I can’t tell if it’s a vote for a policy lynch or if it’s a vote because you saw it as a scummy comment:
“Play to win or GTFO. That post has "policy lynch me" written all over it. “
I really don’t like post 51. Dissecting sentences to misrep a certain players thoughts is very scummy. It’s just his way to stay on the wagon, while his reason is actually gone. From the looks of his agreement with CKD, it seems my assumption is correct as he now states players who he saw had opportunistic votes on SW, yet never pointed them out before this. And post 217 once again shows that he likes to go with the flow.
Another thing with Budja, to vote a player for putting a specific player you wanted to have policy lynched at L-1, something like that needs an explanation. Especially after seeing post 179, this needs an explanation.
Budja, what was the difference between BMC’s reasons for voting SW and the reasons MR gave?
Why did you leave the policy lynch you wanted so much?
And why do you see Lynx as town?


@dank
You really need some explaining to do. First of all, you state in post 67 that you don’t like the growing wagon on SW. Either I can’t read or you need to explain your vote against Saber, because I think it said something that you wanted a bigger wagon.
Secondly, you stated that you didn’t like the growing bandwagon. Heck, you even call it scummy to put him so close to L-1. However, you don’t look at those who have voted SW. Why’s that?
And last, your vote against Paradox. Three players hadn’t posted since page 1 at the time you made that vote: Scott, Lowell and Paradox. Why Paradox over the others?
Wait, did I just say last? Sorry, I didn’t see your post after post 65. I’m talking about post 71. You just stated that you didn’t like the growing bandwagon. Yet, soon after your unvote, he gets put back at L-2. When somebody points this out, you just state that SW was put at L-2, not L-1. And that’s all you have to say after your comment of not liking a growing bandwagon on SW. This needs an explanation.
Can you also explain why you voted Hewitt in post 76?
Up next, post 120. Here you state that MR’s vote against SW was bad. However, right after her vote, you switched your SW vote towards Paradox as he hadn’t posted ever since page 1. What’s up with that?
As for post 144, I once again need an explanation. You state that SW’s ‘approach’ is causing the town to ignore him. But isn’t it so that SW has been the talk of the day? So please explain how the town is ignoring him.

@GP
What did you think of SW’s actions/posts up to and including post 82?
You also give a lot of ‘outs’ (BMC and SW) which is something I don’t like.
Post 178 is very scummy. Especially when combined with posts 154 and 192.
First of, posts 178 and 154. In post 154, she states that she can see SW-town play like this as he has done it before. Not only this, she also likes some of his observations. But in post 178, she states the opinion of wanting to hammer him if he keeps continuing like this. Total different opinion compared to post 154.
Why 192? GP’s reason for thinking to vote SW is the same reason as MR did. Yet GP called that vote opportunistic. However, there’s one difference. MR at least thought SW’s behaviour was scummy, while GP was up for policy lynching him. Add that she now wants SW to live after stating her thoughts of thinking about hammering him if he keeps playing like this.
The opinion changes in these posts need some explanation.
Talking about post 192, see the hypocricy when she states that MR’s focusing on only one player. Because when you state that you think scum is on a wagon, but only focus on one of them, then you’re in the same area.

@Scott
I prefer lynching scummy players over lurkers.
Anyway, on to your posts. You state that it’s scummy to lynch SW based upon his playstyle. Yet, this only gets pointed out after CKD asked his question about his BMC case. Why didn’t you point this out in regards to the other players who supported the SW wagon for this reason?
This and the stuff about LAL (Saying that lurking is more of a scumtell in this set-up, but not doing anything with it) reinforces my thoughts of you not scumhunting.
What was your opinion of post 178 from GP?

@MBC
The pointing fingers attempt has been written down.
OMGUS in post 121.
The reason for your vote against MR was bad already. But after stating that you prefer to lynch somebody scummy over getting a lynch with information (Referring to your vote change from SW to MR), it gets even worse as you stated before how scummy SW was.
And BMC still hasn’t responded to this:
[quote="Dank"]Tell me, he's said he's new to the game, and everyone could tell. It was also plainly obvious he got overwhelmed towards the end. Why would scumNoob MR replace out in that situation while townNoob MR stays in? Explain that please.

You're somehow saying that means he's scum, which is both ignorant and taking advantage of a situation. Sounds like you want to lynch MR quickly before he even gets a replacement, simply because he asked for one.[quote]

Lowell still needs to answer why he supports the BMC case.

Lynx needs to explain why he only commented on Scott in post 104, but not other players for doing so.
I also would like to hear why you pointed out that CKD is worse than Dank regarding the BMC case towards BMC (see post 127)

The only thing I have to say about Hewitt is that I didn't like his passiveness at the start of this game.


As said earlier, Budja and Dank are my main suspects. Still leaving it at that.

Vote Budja

Other suspects would be GP and Saber (Though my gut says he's town).

[Sanhora]

Mod, you should read this

Guess I won't get a response from Saber

[curiouskarmadog]

typing while reading.

I can't quit, or I lose my bet. You already know that hewitt.

on a side note and completely ungame related: What the fuck? I understand why you are getting heat, your play is bad. As scum or town it is bad and you are hurting the game. Why even bother playing mafia?
The mod's rule says don’t mention any other games….the bet is in another game right? SO FUCKING STOP REFERENCING IT. I called it correctly with your first post. You are making the game less fun. Close to asking for a replacement and out of 60 games I have only replaced out of one. KNOCK IT OFF. Play the game..or quit. I don’t give a shit about a bet….I have nothing to do with a bet and shouldnt be affected by it.

Mod, you have already given him a warning…if he mentions this other game again, I request you modkill or replace him.

Now back to actually finding scum.

San, saber’s first post I read as excusing poor play here. Had no clue it was going to be this bullshit…I thought he was excusing lurking or something. Never played with him before (that I know of).

Mod, you should read this

Guess I won't get a response from Saber

Thank you, mod please replace him.

question for group...if he is banned for his play on this site, is he still worth a vote for this game? Why or why not?

also San...mind telling me who you are an alt of...your post is too experienced to be a newbie.

[ZEEnon]

saberwolf has been banned is currently being replaced.

[Sanhora]

question for group...if he is banned for his play on this site, is he still worth a vote for this game? Why or why not?

To me, he is. As stated in my post with all my thoughts, he did some scummy things, making him one of my suspects. Though there are others who are scummier, so right now, he won't get my vote.

also San...mind telling me who you are an alt of...your post is too experienced to be a newbie.

True. Alt here. Though this should be known as I signed-up for a game in which you need to have finished one game or more on this site.
But no, if I wanted to tell others who I was, I'd have stated in the sign-up topic of said game or have put it in my sig. In case it interests you, I joined in the second half of 2008 and we've played before.

[curiouskarmadog]

fair enough

[dank]

@dank
You really need some explaining to do. First of all, you state in post 67 that you don’t like the growing wagon on SW. Either I can’t read or you need to explain your vote against Saber, because I think it said something that you wanted a bigger wagon.

Post 67 is self explanatory, it is never a good idea to give someone who self hammers a chance to self hammer on page 3 (I believe Saber was at L-2 there). In general, I dont like such big bandwagons in the first few pages, as they have all the makings of a quick lynch, and it doesn't give us much to analyze a player on, which is a bad place for town to be with two scum groups on day 1.

Secondly, you stated that you didn’t like the growing bandwagon. Heck, you even call it scummy to put him so close to L-1. However, you don’t look at those who have voted SW. Why’s that?

Erm, its page 3, and we're just just getting out of RVS. There isn't exactly much to analyze at the moment.

And last, your vote against Paradox. Three players hadn’t posted since page 1 at the time you made that vote: Scott, Lowell and Paradox. Why Paradox over the others?

Why Lowell or Scott over paradox? I can only vote one, right?
(I voted a player who's input I couldn't remember at all, and who was thus lurking.)

Wait, did I just say last? Sorry, I didn’t see your post after post 65. I’m talking about post 71. You just stated that you didn’t like the growing bandwagon. Yet, soon after your unvote, he gets put back at L-2. When somebody points this out, you just state that SW was put at L-2, not L-1. And that’s all you have to say after your comment of not liking a growing bandwagon on SW. This needs an explanation.

What would you like me to explain? I said I didn't like the bandwagon, and I pointed out an inconsistency. Would you like me to copy paste what i said 6 posts ago into 71, because it might not be clear enough?

Can you also explain why you voted Hewitt in post 76?

Um, because he was sitting on the sideline not voting or pursuing anyone, while throwing out silly accusations? I explained this in 76? Did you read?

Up next, post 120. Here you state that MR’s vote against SW was bad. However, right after her vote, you switched your SW vote towards Paradox as he hadn’t posted ever since page 1. What’s up with that?

You really want me to explain why "lets see you hammer yourself" is bad on page 3? Really? I switched to Saber in post 144, after paradox had made a few posts (besides, the support for a scummy player > someone who's lurking). Also, we now had 6 pages of info to go on for saber, at which point I felt comfortable about placing a vote on him, he'd well earned it by then.

As for post 144, I once again need an explanation. You state that SW’s ‘approach’ is causing the town to ignore him. But isn’t it so that SW has been the talk of the day? So please explain how the town is ignoring him.

sigh, did you read anything I posted? I said: "Saber's trying to tempt the town with his lynch so much that the wifom it brings simply causes the town to largely ignore him

the rest of the way

, paving the way for a smooth ride as scum."


Really not impressed with your questioning here, almost everything can be explained by just reading my posts, which it doesn't seem you did?

..back to finals! D:

[Sanhora]

Dank, when you post a defence, let it be a defence and not what you just did.
Let's start:

@dank
You really need some explaining to do. First of all, you state in post 67 that you don’t like the growing wagon on SW. Either I can’t read or you need to explain your vote against Saber, because I think it said something that you wanted a bigger wagon.

Post 67 is self explanatory, it is never a good idea to give someone who self hammers a chance to self hammer on page 3 (I believe Saber was at L-2 there). In general, I dont like such big bandwagons in the first few pages, as they have all the makings of a quick lynch, and it doesn't give us much to analyze a player on, which is a bad place for town to be with two scum groups on day 1.

This just reinforces how fake everything you do comes across. You unvoted, because you didn't like the growing bandwagon. But everything you later state gives me the imression that you don't really care. Why?
As first pointed out, the comment after CKD unvoted. Now, we can add two more. You state here that it's dangerous as there are two scumteams and therefore it can lead to a quicklynch. This reinforces my thoughts as after CKD unvoted and said that BMC put SW at L-1, you only state that it was L-2. As if it's no big deal.
The second thing also has to do with the L-2. Because after your comment, Hewitt said that this is basically L-1 as SW threatened to self-vote. You stated back then that it's possible he'd do so and now again, but soon after you vote Hewitt as SW had stated he wouldn't do so.

Secondly, you stated that you didn’t like the growing bandwagon. Heck, you even call it scummy to put him so close to L-1. However, you don’t look at those who have voted SW. Why’s that?

Erm, its page 3, and we're just just getting out of RVS. There isn't exactly much to analyze at the moment.

Yeah, sure. Do you really expect me to believe that?
You've stated twice how bad MR's vote was. But not after she made the vote (As you switched to Paradox and didn't comment on her) Only after it was pointed out by somebody else and now you state that we were just out of the RVS. Doesn't matter at all. And you later seem to see this as well as you state in your 'defence' post that MR's post was bad.

Does this mean that you could remember something from Scott or Lowell?

Can you also explain why you voted Hewitt in post 76?

Um, because he was sitting on the sideline not voting or pursuing anyone, while throwing out silly accusations? I explained this in 76? Did you read?

I asked because I wasn't sure which reason was the main reason. Though any of those reasons mentioned would have been scummy as main reason. Why this one?
You voted Hewitt as he wasn't contributing. This was in post 76. You're following post (post 83) you have a post aimed at SW. What's asked of SW? To be more useful, including some questions from you for him to answer. Seems to me that bboth did the same, yet two different reactions. Please explain why you reacted differently.

Up next, post 120. Here you state that MR’s vote against SW was bad. However, right after her vote, you switched your SW vote towards Paradox as he hadn’t posted ever since page 1. What’s up with that?

You really want me to explain why "lets see you hammer yourself" is bad on page 3? Really? I switched to Saber in post 144, after paradox had made a few posts (

besides, the support for a scummy player > someone who's lurking

). Also, we now had 6 pages of info to go on for saber, at which point I felt comfortable about placing a vote on him, he'd well earned it by then.

Do you even get what I'm saying here?
I'm saying this:
You had your vote on Saber.
MR votes (which you think was a bad vote) and you later unvote.
Instead of voting bad-vote-maker MR, you vote Paradox.
I'm asking why?
And I'm especially curious now after stating the bolded.

sigh, did you read anything I posted? I said: "Saber's trying to tempt the town with his lynch so much that the wifom it brings simply causes the town to largely ignore him

the rest of the way

, paving the way for a smooth ride as scum."

Then I have no idea what you're saying. Please elaborate.


How I love obv-scum.

[dank]

lol.

Once again, a few posts before I made my L-2 clarification, I said I didnt' like the bandwagon. I am not going to cry "DONT VOTE SABER!" every time someone votes him, they can do whatever they choose. I merely said why I was against it, people may listen to me or ignore it.

There is a difference between doing nothing but accusing people of more blame than they are post "L-2 is like L-1, you scum!", which is what hewitt was doing, and actually pressing someone, which is what my questioning of saber was.

MR's vote wasn't as bad as it looks now back then, because it occurred in RVC. As we proceeded out of RVC and MR chose to leave his vote there pages later, it began to look much much worse. Thus, it wasn't addressed till later.

Regarding paradox, I don't even know what to tell you. I voted a lurker as we got out of RVS. Apparently I voted the wrong one? Sorry?

My reasoning for voting saber have been expressed multiple times in multiple posts, and if you have no idea what that is, then you did a very poor job reading this game.

Saber throws around his smokescreen, basically begging for a lynch. People consider it on D1, eventually backing off thinking "he's acting too scummy to be scum, he has to be town", as some players here have already done, and that wifom causes the town the ignore scummy behavior for the rest of the game, giving him a smooth ride. Scum has every reason to use this strategy, town has none.

[Scott Brosius]

Scott Brocious-you made a point before about saber acting like the previous game where he was VT. You also seem to say his behavior has been changing. Is his behavior different from the other game now?

His behavior is similar, especially with his back against the wall. That game was before the bet though. He did not come into the game as brash as he did in this game. Although I guess it doesn't really matter since he is gone now.

The reason I voted MR was because he replaced under pressure. This seems scummy to me, but if its universally recognized as not scummy, I guess I should change my vote....I don't know, I'll decide later.

Why do you care so much what other people think? If you think it's scummy, vote for him. You seem very willing to go with whatever BW will stick with the post.

@Scott
I prefer lynching scummy players over lurkers.
Anyway, on to your posts. You state that it’s scummy to lynch SW based upon his playstyle. Yet, this only gets pointed out after CKD asked his question about his BMC case. Why didn’t you point this out in regards to the other players who supported the SW wagon for this reason?
This and the stuff about LAL (Saying that lurking is more of a scumtell in this set-up, but not doing anything with it) reinforces my thoughts of you not scumhunting.
What was your opinion of post 178 from GP?

I pointed it after after SW at least made an effort to scumhunt. That was why my comment was timed then.

In the last time I played this setup, 2 scum (1 WW 1 mafia) were heavy lurkers. Constant prodding really limited posting. 1 scum was a little more active but still lurking quite a bit. These were the 3 biggest lurkers in the game and they were all scum. Is that going to mean lurkers in this game are scum? Not necessarily, but I figured since I just played this setup where that was true, I would offer my experience and start some discussion.

As for your comment that I ask about lurkers then do nothing about it, I said this in my original post

What does everyone think about lynching lurkers? I'm usually against it D1 since if that person is town, there are limited interactions to go off of,

As for 178- I always find it useless when someone says "I THINK THERE ARE SCUM ON THIS WAGON". Obviously. There are going to be scum on every wagon. Saying that in an attempt to defend someone or say that you don't like a wagon is useless. In this setup especially where almost half the game is not aligned with the town, of course there are going to be scum on a wagon. I think the comments about SW are null at this point since he is gone.

[bigmc109]

SB: If replacing out under pressure isn't considered a scumtell, then my vote shouldn't be there because it was based off my assumption that it was a very clear scumtell. I guess I'll switch my vote back, then. SW's play isn't excused even if it was meant to be disruptive.

Unvote, Vote:Saberwolf

[Lynx The Antithesis]

Lynx needs to explain why he only commented on Scott in post 104, but not other players for doing so.

Because I thought Scott called all five players on the saberwolf wagon anti-town without mentioning one specifically or voting any of us. It was cleared up that he was referring to the actual amount of scum in the game, not the wagon.

I also would like to hear why you pointed out that CKD is worse than Dank regarding the BMC case towards BMC (see post 127)

Not worse just a stronger advocate against BigMc. CKD asked every player in the game to comment on the BigMC vote. It just seemed odd for BigMC to string the two of them together in a FOS when Dank wasn't even voting him.

dank and saber both look town to me, despite their lover's spats.

Why?

[curiouskarmadog]

Mod: going out of town for the holiday, 12/18 not coming back until 12/27. Posting will be light (I think)..replace if you need too, dont know what my access will be like (going to my wife's folks, I think they have internet).

[Budja]

@San.

Can you explain your vote against SW in post 32? Due to the following statement, I can’t tell if it’s a vote for a policy lynch or if it’s a vote because you saw it as a scummy comment: “Play to win or GTFO. That post has "policy lynch me" written all over it. “

A policy pressure vote.

I really don’t like post 51. Dissecting sentences to misrep a certain players thoughts is very scummy.

I didn't misrep him. He said he would try, but he kept the "but I don't really care anyway" attitude.

[...] correct as he now states players who he saw had opportunistic votes on SW, yet never pointed them out before this. And post 217 once again shows that he likes to go with the flow.

I pointed them out after they happened. I can't point them out before they happened can I.

Another thing with Budja, to vote a player for putting a specific player you wanted to have policy lynched at L-1, something like that needs an explanation. Especially after seeing post 179, this needs an explanation.

It was actually intended as a hammer.

Budja, what was the difference between BMC’s reasons for voting SW and the reasons MR gave?

Very little but BMC reacted worse.

Why did you leave the policy lynch you wanted so much?

Saber said he would change. Thats all I wanted.

And why do you see Lynx as town?

Well, I do have a strong "gut" town read and I haven't seen anything too objectional in his posting yet.

[ZEEnon]

Vote Count:

saberwolf:

Paradoxombie, dank, Lynx The Antithesis, hewitt, Budja, bigmc109

Sanhora:

danakillsu, Scott Brosius, saberwolf

bigmc109:

curiouskarmadog, Lowell

Budja:

Sanhora

Not Voting:

No one

With 12 players alive, it takes 7 to lynch.
Deadline: December 23rd, 2009 at approximately 10 p.m.

danakillsu replaced GinzkeyPlatz. Welcome!

[danakillsu]

/confirm
Hey, everyone.

[Lowell]

I think saber's recent behavior deserves a lynch.

I'll give dan a chance to chime in, however.

[curiouskarmadog]

HUH?

saberwolf has been banned is currently being replaced.

not sure why everyone is so hot to lynch someone who is getting replaced and is banned for the same antics that he pulled here.

oh wait...yes I do, scum want an easy lynch.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

I think saber's recent behavior deserves a lynch.

I'll give dan a chance to chime in, however.

Thats strange considering that your very last post you said him and Dank both look town which you never bothered to explain either. Now you're saying his recent behavior is deserving of a lynch? Exlain this to me please.

FOS:Lowell

[Lynx The Antithesis]

HUH?

saberwolf has been banned is currently being replaced.

not sure why everyone is so hot to lynch someone who is getting replaced and is banned for the same antics that he pulled here.

oh wait...yes I do, scum want an easy lynch.

So regardless of how scummy he plays we just have to let it go by?